OK so Obama is stating the his program is revenue neutral.  For those of you who believe that-please allow me to present a few facts and opinions.

1-The Senate Finance Committee “carefully” drafted a bill that assumes that cuts in Medicare will save $200 billion with cuts to the “Sustainable Growth Rate” cuts to Medicare spending through 2012 and beyond.  (Sound the trumpets please)…  These same requirements drafted by the CBO have been in place since 2003-and every year Congress has vetoed these same cuts. The assumption that Congress will all of a sudden get financially prudent is silly and certainly not realistic to budget savings accordingly.

2-Another similar analysis applies to the other 200 billion that the government seeks to cut from fraud, waste and abuse from Medicare and other federal health care spending. Well, hasn’t the government been promising to do this since my parents were born? Every now and then a little “fingernail” get’s trimmed.  But, the last time I checked the spending keeps rising and proportionately fraud and waste follow right behind.  Please explain how this pattern is now all of a sudden going to change?

3-It also worth noting that the Baucus bill includes more spending than cuts.  The biggest is the 40% tax on health insurance plans in excess of $8,000 for individual and $21,000 for families-the “Cadillac” plans.

So, to sum this up provided that the sun rises in the west and sets in the east I think the Obama care health care bill will be (1) deficit neutral, (2) be on budget and (3) reduce the budget-as stated.

I have been in the California Health Insurance Market for about 10 years and thus I have been following this really close.   Some of the controversial issues are listed below and how it will affect you are:

1-Will I be able to keep my current doctor? Maybe not.  If you employer deems the government plan will cost save him money (the fine is less than his company premium) you can bet your last nickle some employers that offer group coverage will drop their company plan and force employees to go on the government plan.   Like Medicare and Medical many doctors don’t accept these plan, even Medicare Supplements (they don’t pay the market rate for services) and if you fall into this situation you may be forced to find a new health care provider.

2-How will the government pay for the program? Well, politicians say that it will be deficit neutral and won’t add a dime to the deficit.  If this is the case this will be the first (ever) government program to be delivered on budget and on time.  If we look at Medicare and Medical and even Social Security they are completely under funded and tinkering on being financially insolvent.    I think this statement is mis-leading and not even possible-to say the least.  Plus, they have identified $600 billion dollars to TAKE from Medicare to pay for this program. As if there was just $600 billion dollars of money sitting there that they are “waiting” to take from roll out their plan?  If it is there “why have the been waiting so long to save the tax payers the money”-come on?

These are just (2) areas of concern and conversation that I thought I would throw out to the web world. Your comments pro or con are much appreciated.